Re: 2.6.17-rt8 crash amd64

[Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>]

On Tue, 2006-08-01 at 18:18 -0700, Bill Huey wrote:
> Hello folks,
> 
> I'm getting this:
> 
> [   41.989355] BUG: scheduling while atomic: udevd/0x00000001/1101
> [   41.995501]
> [   41.995502] Call Trace:
> [   41.999458]        <ffffffff8025ef65>{__schedule+155}
> [   42.004805]        <ffffffff80261702>{_raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+72}
> [   42.011583]        <ffffffff802996c5>{task_blocks_on_rt_mutex+497}
> [   42.018095]        <ffffffff802a86a4>{free_pages_bulk+42}
> [   42.023799]        <ffffffff80291be3>{find_task_by_pid_type+24}
> [   42.030039]        <ffffffff802a86a4>{free_pages_bulk+42}
> [   42.035742]        <ffffffff8025fd89>{schedule+236}
> [   42.040907]        <ffffffff8026078f>{rt_lock_slowlock+351}
> [   42.046798]        <ffffffff80261702>{_raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+72}
> [   42.053577]        <ffffffff8026117d>{__lock_text_start+13}
> [   42.059459]        <ffffffff802a86a4>{free_pages_bulk+42}
> [   42.065161]        <ffffffff802616e6>{_raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+44}
> [   42.071940]        <ffffffff802a8b5a>{__free_pages_ok+428}
> [   42.077733]        <ffffffff8022e29f>{__free_pages+48}
> [   42.083168]        <ffffffff802365bb>{free_pages+133}
> [   42.088514]        <ffffffff8025a92a>{free_task+24}
> [   42.093678]        <ffffffff802474b7>{__put_task_struct+189}
> [   42.099650]        <ffffffff8025fac4>{thread_return+208}
> [   42.105264]        <ffffffff802996c5>{task_blocks_on_rt_mutex+497}
> [   42.111774]        <ffffffff8029ae98>{atomic_dec_and_spin_lock+21}
> [   42.118284]        <ffffffff80291be3>{find_task_by_pid_type+24}
> [   42.124525]        <ffffffff8029ae98>{atomic_dec_and_spin_lock+21}
> [   42.131032]        <ffffffff8025fd89>{schedule+236}
> [   42.136195]        <ffffffff8026078f>{rt_lock_slowlock+351}
> [   42.142086]        <ffffffff8026117d>{__lock_text_start+13}
> [   42.147966]        <ffffffff8029ae98>{atomic_dec_and_spin_lock+21}
> [   42.154476]        <ffffffff8020c4e9>{dput+57}
> [   42.159194]        <ffffffff802093f3>{__link_path_walk+1710}
> [   42.165166]        <ffffffff802617ad>{_raw_spin_unlock+46}
> [   42.170961]        <ffffffff8020db81>{link_path_walk+103}
> [   42.176672]        <ffffffff8020be5a>{do_path_lookup+644}
> [   42.182379]        <ffffffff80223829>{__user_walk_fd+63}
> [   42.187994]        <ffffffff8023fce4>{vfs_lstat_fd+33}
> [   42.193434]        <ffffffff8022b3e4>{sys_newlstat+34}
> [   42.198871]        <ffffffff8025ce3d>{error_exit+0}
> [   42.204040]        <ffffffff8025bf22>{system_call+126}

This back trace is definitely ugly.  Do you get this all the time? And
if so, could you compile in frame pointers and try again.  (I'll dig
through this in the mean time.) 

-- Steve

> [   42.209715] ---------------------------
> [   42.213716] | preempt count: 00000001 ]
> [   42.217715] | 1-level deep critical section nesting:
> [   42.222879] ----------------------------------------
> [   42.228043] .. [<ffffffff8025ef7d>] .... __schedule+0xb3/0xb2a
> [   42.234150] .....[<ffffffff8025fd89>] ..   ( <= schedule+0xec/0x11e)
> [   42.240796]
> [   53.347726] NET: Registered protocol family 10
> [   53.353240] IPv6 over IPv4 tunneling driver
> 
>